In the Central Information Commission
at
New Delhi
File No: CIC/AD/A/2011/001765
Heard through Video Conferencing.
Date of Hearing : October 7, 2011
Date of Decision : October 7, 2011
Parties:
Applicant
Shri Arun Prakash
West Judge Colony
R P S More Saguna
Post Danapur
Patna
Bihar.
Applicant was not present.
Respondent(s)
East Central Railway
Sr.Divisional Personnel Officer
Danapur
Bihar.
Respresentative : Shri Dharmatma Singh, Sr.Divl.Personnel Officer.
Information Commissioner : Mrs. Annapurna Dixit
___________________________________________________________________
In the Central Information Commission
at
New Delhi
File No: CIC/AD/A/2011/001765
ORDER
Background
1. The RTI application dated 4.5.11 was filed by the Applicant with the PIO Sr.Divl. Personnel Officer,
E C Railway, Danapur. The Applicant stated that although he had qualified in the promotional
examination from Asst.Loco Pilot to Loco Pilot (Goods) held in the year 2004, his name was not
included in the promotion list dated 28.1.2005. He stated that he was informed in response to his RTI
application that he had cleared the examination in the year 2004 and his seniority would be counted
from the year 2004. In this connection he sought the reason as to why he has not been granted
benefits of seniority from the year 2004 inspite of admitting the same before the CIC. The PIO replied
on 23.5.11 informing the Applicant that information has been sought from the concerned
department while enclosing the reply received. In this reply the Asst.Personnel Officer stated that a
panel for successful candidates for the post of Loco Pilot (Goods) was published on 8.9.09 in which
it is clearly mentioned against Sl.No.1, Shri Arun Prakash is empanelled with reference to his
successful result in the previous panel approved by the Competent Authority on 11.10.04 as per
GM(P)/HJP’s letter dated 23.9.04. His seniority on promotion will be assigned in accordance with his
seniority status in the previous panel. Not satisfied with this reply the Applicant filed his first appeal
on 30.5.11 stating that he has not been provided the information required by him. The Appellate
Authority replied on 20.6.11 enclosing another reply provided by the APO, Danapur who stated that
information has already been provided on 23.5.11. Being aggrieved with this reply the Applicant filed
his second appeal before the Commission.
Decision.
2 . The Commission after hearing the Respondents directs the PIO to provide the Appellant the rule by
which it is decided that he is not entitled to financial benefits from the year 2004. This information to
be provided by 5th November 2011.
3. The appeal is accordingly disposed of.
(Annapurna Dixit)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy
(G.Subramanian)
Deputy Registrar
1. Shri Arun Prakash
West Judge Colony
R P S More Saguna
Post Danapur
Patna
Bihar.
2. The Public Information Officer
East Central Railway
Sr.Divisional Personnel Officer
Danapur
Bihar.
3. The Appellate Authority
East Central Railway
Additional Divisional Personnel Officer
Danapur
Bihar.
4. Officer Incharge, NIC.
In case, the Commission’s above directives have not been complied with by the Respondents, the
Appellant/Complainant may file a formal complaint with the Commission under Section 18(1) of the RTI Act, giving
(1) copy of RTI application, (2) copy of PIO’s reply, (3) copy of the decision of the first Appellant Authority, (4) copy
of the Commission’s decision, and (5) any other documents which he/she considers to be necessary for deciding
the complaint. In the prayer, the Appellant/Complainant may indicate, what information has not been provided.